Show simple item record

contributor authorRutherford, Scott D.
contributor authorMann, Michael E.
contributor authorAmmann, Caspar M.
contributor authorWahl, Eugene R.
date accessioned2017-06-09T16:29:51Z
date available2017-06-09T16:29:51Z
date copyright2010/05/01
date issued2010
identifier issn0894-8755
identifier otherams-68924.pdf
identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4210536
description abstractIn a recent paper, Christiansen et al. compared climate reconstruction methods using surrogate ensembles from a coupled general circulation model and pseudoproxies. Their results using the regularized expectation maximization method with truncated total least squares (RegEM-TTLS) appear inconsistent with previous studies. Results presented here show that the poor performance of RegEM-TTLS in Christiansen et al. is due to 1) their use of the nonhybrid method compared to the hybrid method; 2) a stagnation tolerance that is too large and does not permit the solution to stabilize, which is compounded in another paper by Christiansen et al. by the introduction of an inappropriate measure of stagnation; and 3) their use of a truncation parameter that is too large. Thus, the poor performance of RegEM-TTLS in both Christiansen et al. papers is due to poor implementation of the method rather than to shortcomings inherent to the method.
publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
titleComments on “A Surrogate Ensemble Study of Climate Reconstruction Methods: Stochasticity and Robustness”
typeJournal Paper
journal volume23
journal issue10
journal titleJournal of Climate
identifier doi10.1175/2009JCLI3146.1
journal fristpage2832
journal lastpage2838
treeJournal of Climate:;2010:;volume( 023 ):;issue: 010
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record